background or foreground copies, CPU eating

[wwp]

Hello Yury,


On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 22:00:19 +0100 "Yury V. Zaytsev" <yury at shurup.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 10:47 +0100, wwp wrote:
> > 
> > Could anyone tell me what's the difference between foreground and
> > background copies? Are background copies being 'niced' down or
> > low-system prioritized? If so, could that be an option for foreground
> > copies, to make them more user-friendly? 
> 
> I think that this has been discussed before and the conclusion was that
> it's related to the perpetual re-drawing of the copy progress dialog. 
> 
> Unfortunately, if you redraw it often enough, it slows things down, but
> if you don't, then it's not interactive anymore...
> 
> I'm not sure whether there is a nice solution to this problem, other
> than using background operations, when you know in advance that it will
> take a lot of time.

Hm maybe.. I just wonder how does the copy process handle non
interaction, in case of overwrite, read or write error handling etc.

Anyway, the background copy does really work faster for slow devices,
this is great.

I think I'll get a look to the sources in order to understand exactly
how it works, when I get spare time (meaning, not tomorrow ;-) ).

Thanks!


Regards,

-- 
wwp
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.midnight-commander.org/pipermail/mc/attachments/20131228/56e6b8bb/attachment.asc>